Unnecessary street signs, Are there any around town? Options

[Mark NWN]

Unnecessary street signs

Communities Secretary Eric Pickles has said a large number of street signs are hurting the character of towns and villages.

So the government is now asking councils to cut down on unnecessary signs, which could confuse motorists.

Can you think of any areas of Newbury where road signs are, in your opinion, confusing, unsightly, or unnecessary?

If so, post them below.

[Iommi]

I think 'over-use' of street signs is indicative of poorly designed road layouts; the junction between Bartholomew Street and Market Street, for me, is an obvious example.

[Brad]

You can put a million road signs up and some motorists wouldn't notice, *cough bollards cough*.

They may be ugly but are useful, so absolutely no point cutting them down, what a waste of tax payers money buying them in the first place if they just get rid of them.

[Bloggo]

It would be an awful waste of money and time for the council to engage in this exercise. Why not leave it all alone and think very carefully before adding any more.

What I would like the council to consider and legislate against is the huge amout of estate agents boards that litter our streets. They are ugly and untidy.
Why does a property up for sale need a sign outside? Is there any need for them today?
Surley after having looked at the details of a property for sale it would not be difficult to find it. It is just not necessary.

[Darren]

Most new signs are made of a plastic composite material so no scrap value there to boost the coffers.

It's the "car boot sale" and "happy birthday Fred" signs that I find annoying.

[Bofem]

Most new signs are made of a plastic composite material so no scrap value there to boost the coffers.

It's the "car boot sale" and "happy birthday Fred" signs that I find annoying.

Blimey. Is Newbury holding a Mr Miserable Competition this year?

[Biker1]

Unnecessary street signs

Communities Secretary Eric Pickles has said a large number of street signs are hurting the character of towns and villages.

So the government is now asking councils to cut down on unnecessary signs, which could confuse motorists.

Can you think of any areas of Newbury where road signs are, in your opinion, confusing, unsightly, or unnecessary?

If so, post them below.

Those ones that seem to be everywhere now that light up in your face as you approach them.

[Darren]

Most new signs are made of a plastic composite material so no scrap value there to boost the coffers.

It's the "car boot sale" and "happy birthday Fred" signs that I find annoying.

Yep

I would mind so much if they removed them afterwards, but that seems too much like hard work so you see them months afterwards.

[JeffG]

Those ones that seem to be everywhere now that light up in your face as you approach them.

Only if you're going too fast.

[On the edge]

It would improve the street scene considerably. Arguably make it less easy for excuses for bad driving - no signs would mean strictly concentrating on whats right in front of you. Approach seems to work in Central London.

[x2lls]

Only if you're going too fast.

Speed is not a factor, those stupid signs are a distraction.

[spartacus]

Another load of bollox from another Minister trying to justify his role.... 'Communities Secretary?' give me strength.....

There may be isolated examples where 'street furniture' adds clutter, but generally the signs serve a purpose and are a legal requirement. If Mr Pickles is so concerned about the aesthetics of the streetscape in urban environments perhaps the first step would be to look at some of the cumbersome legislation that is required by law to make speed limits, parking restrictions, traffic movement restrictions etc etc et-bleedin'-cetera enforceable.

If they were removed there would be some 'no win, no fee' lawyer stepping in to argue the case for every motorist who had an accident because he didn't know where he was going/wasn't warned about the Deadly Bollards of Newbury.....

And while some may be asking for signs to be removed, 'coz it make the road look ugly', others ask for guardrails all the way along the A339 to prevent re-occurence of that one in a million chance of someone falling under a passing lorry. And local businesses, pubs and other tourist attractions demand MORE signs at every junction to direct people to their watering holes..


That said.... going towards Lambourn.... dirty great signs in an <ahem> Area of OUTSTANDING Natural Beauty and we have these YOU ARE NOW ENTERING THE VALLEY OF THE RACEHORSE signs.... Get rid of them for a start....

[JeffG]

Speed is not a factor, those stupid signs are a distraction.

Yes it is and they are not stupid. If you are within the speed limit, they don't come on. They are designed to draw the attention of the speeding motorist to the fact. And far more "user friendly" (and cheaper) than cameras.

[Biker1]

Yes it is and they are not stupid. If you are within the speed limit, they don't come on. They are designed to draw the attention of the speeding motorist to the fact. And far more "user friendly" (and cheaper) than cameras.

Not just the speeding ones - there are some that light up no matter what speed you are doing.

Some light up before the speed restriction begins so you are not in fact speeding when they illuminate. And yes, they are a distraction.

[spartacus]

Not just the speeding ones - there are some that light up no matter what speed you are doing.

They aren't just positioned within 30mph speed limits. They're often placed where there may be a problem with inappropriate speed. Take the B4494 for instance. National speed limit applies (60mph in case you've forgotten). On Bussock Hill (about 2 miles south of The Crab) there's a sign that flashes up with a bend warning sign and 'SLOW DOWN' message.

Is that a distraction? Should that be removed? Or does it serve a useful purpose?

Numerous RTAs there in recent years including 3 fatals. The sign went up over a year ago.. How many serious incidents since then? None

[Iommi]

Best stop digging eh Biker1?

Spartacus is not correct. I've seen slow down signs flash up in 30 limits - usually with my front bumper pressed deep in to ground, while scrubbing speed off! Well I can't help it if a bird walks past with a short skirt on!

[Biker1]

Is that a distraction? Should that be removed? Or does it serve a useful purpose?

The question posed at the start of this thread was what is your opinion on unsightly or unnecessary road signs.
I was just posting my opinion.

Obviously you think there are not too many, I think there are.

The answers to your questions (only in my opinion) are yes, yes and no.

Or do we have flashing signs for those who cannot, or choose not to, drive properly on every bend or set of bends in the country?
All you need is a standard "bend(s) ahead" sign.

There are many sad and unfortunate accidents on the roads at different sites every day. Do you suggest a flashing warning sign be erected at all of these sites less it happen again?

It is not the roads that are dangerous - it is the drivers!

[GMR]

I think 'over-use' of street signs is indicative of poorly designed road layouts; the junction between Bartholomew Street and Market Street, for me, is an obvious example.

I agree. I also think Newbury has far too many signs.

[Iommi]

Some posts here, I think, have deviated from the original concept, which I believe was focused on signage in towns and cities. I understand that 'supplementary' signs are erected where there are exceptional accident rates, or complaints. I don't think there are too many signs, but perhaps there might be a lack of effective signage.

[GMR]

Some posts here, I think, have deviated from the original concept, which I believe was focused on signage in towns and cities. I understand that 'supplementary' signs are erected where there are exceptional accident rates, or complaints. I don't think there are too many signs, but perhaps there might be a lack of effective signage.

I haven't deviated... I answered properly.